draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-07.txt   draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-08.txt 
Reliable Multicast Transport (RMT) Luby Reliable Multicast Transport (RMT) Luby
Working Group Watson Working Group Watson
Internet-Draft Vicisano Internet-Draft Vicisano
Obsoletes: 3450 (if approved) Qualcomm Inc. Obsoletes: 3450 (if approved) Qualcomm Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track July 13, 2009 Intended status: Standards Track September 3, 2009
Expires: January 14, 2010 Expires: March 7, 2010
Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC) Protocol Instantiation Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC) Protocol Instantiation
draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-07 draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-revised-08
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material
from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly
available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the
copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF
Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the
IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from
the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this
document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and
derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards
Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to
translate it into languages other than English.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010. This Internet-Draft will expire on March 7, 2010.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
skipping to change at page 2, line 18 skipping to change at page 3, line 18
protocol, a massively scalable reliable content delivery protocol. protocol, a massively scalable reliable content delivery protocol.
Asynchronous Layered Coding combines the Layered Coding Transport Asynchronous Layered Coding combines the Layered Coding Transport
(LCT) building block, a multiple rate congestion control building (LCT) building block, a multiple rate congestion control building
block and the Forward Error Correction (FEC) building block to block and the Forward Error Correction (FEC) building block to
provide congestion controlled reliable asynchronous delivery of provide congestion controlled reliable asynchronous delivery of
content to an unlimited number of concurrent receivers from a single content to an unlimited number of concurrent receivers from a single
sender. This document obsoletes RFC3450. sender. This document obsoletes RFC3450.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. Delivery service models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1. Delivery service models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2. Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3. Environmental Requirements and Considerations . . . . . . 5 1.3. Environmental Requirements and Considerations . . . . . . 6
2. Architecture Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Architecture Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1. LCT building block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.1. LCT building block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2. Multiple rate congestion control building block . . . . . 9 2.2. Multiple rate congestion control building block . . . . . 10
2.3. FEC building block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3. FEC building block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.4. Session Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.4. Session Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5. Packet authentication building block . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.5. Packet authentication building block . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3. Conformance Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3. Conformance Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4. Functionality Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4. Functionality Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.1. Packet format used by ALC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.1. Packet format used by ALC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.2. LCT Header-Extension Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.2. LCT Header-Extension Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.3. Sender Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.3. Sender Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.4. Receiver Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.4. Receiver Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.1. Baseline Secure ALC Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5.1. Baseline Secure ALC Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1.1. IPsec Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5.1.1. IPsec Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1.2. IPsec Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.1.2. IPsec Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
8. Changes from RFC3450 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 8. Changes from RFC3450 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
9.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 9.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
9.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 9.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes a massively scalable reliable content This document describes a massively scalable reliable content
delivery protocol, Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC), for multiple delivery protocol, Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC), for multiple
rate congestion controlled reliable content delivery. The protocol rate congestion controlled reliable content delivery. The protocol
is specifically designed to provide massive scalability using IP is specifically designed to provide massive scalability using IP
multicast as the underlying network service. Massive scalability in multicast as the underlying network service. Massive scalability in
this context means the number of concurrent receivers for an object this context means the number of concurrent receivers for an object
is potentially in the millions, the aggregate size of objects to be is potentially in the millions, the aggregate size of objects to be
skipping to change at page 27, line 12 skipping to change at page 28, line 12
o Definition and IANA registration of the EXT_FTI LCT Header o Definition and IANA registration of the EXT_FTI LCT Header
Extension Extension
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative references 9.1. Normative references
[I-D.ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised] [I-D.ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised]
Luby, M., Watson, M., and L. Vicisano, "Layered Coding Luby, M., Watson, M., and L. Vicisano, "Layered Coding
Transport (LCT) Building Block", Transport (LCT) Building Block",
draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-09 (work in progress), draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-revised-11 (work in progress),
March 2009. August 2009.
[RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, [RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
August 1980. August 1980.
[RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host extensions for IP multicasting", STD 5, [RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host extensions for IP multicasting", STD 5,
RFC 1112, August 1989. RFC 1112, August 1989.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 End of changes. 6 change blocks. 
34 lines changed or deleted 44 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/